Posted
by
BeauHDon Monday May 14, 2018 @04:40PM
from the think-smart-not-hard dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Engineers inside Tesla wanted to add robust driver monitoring systems to the company's cars to help make sure drivers safely use Autopilot, and Tesla even worked with suppliers on possible solutions, according to The Wall Street Journal. But those executives -- Elon Musk included -- reportedly rejected the idea out of worry that the options might not work well enough, could be expensive, and because drivers might become annoyed by an overly nagging system.

Tesla considered a few different types of monitoring: one that would track a driver's eyes using a camera and infrared sensors, and another that involved adding more sensors to the steering wheel to make sure that the driver is holding on. Both ideas would help let the car's system know if the driver has stopped paying attention, which could reduce the chance of an accident in situations where Autopilot disengages or is incapable of keeping the car from crashing. Musk later confirmed on Twitter that the eye tracking option was "rejected for being ineffective, not for cost."

Knowing that the driver is holding the steering wheel is not enough. You need to ascertain that all the muscular groups between the fingers and the spine are actively engaged and under tension. That is - fingers, palm, wrist, forearm, elbow, arm, shoulder... only if the muscules in all there areas are actively engaged you will ensure that the driver can take over. Eye tracking and a neural brain interface too to know what the driver is thinking...

They might call it autopilot, but on their web site where they describe the feature it says: "Every driver is responsible for remaining alert and active when using Autopilot, and must be prepared to take action at any time." How could anyone possibly interpret that as "I can take a nap while my car drives me home"?
https://www.tesla.com/autopilo... [tesla.com]

Because it sounds catchy and is technically accurate, even if it's misleading to people who aren't professional airline pilots.

Actual autopilot on aeroplanes is purely assistive - there to make flying the plane a bit easier and somewhat reduce the opportunities for human error - and does not in any way remove the need to have an actual pilot controlling the plane. Tesla's Autopilot serves the exact same role as an aeroplane's autopilot with the same limitation, but in a car, so I suppose they feel that they

How about because it is an accurate description based upon past use. Autopilot in planes and ships, they will take you on the course set, they will not avoid shit or take complex routes, you set them and away they go, don't pay attention and a plane or ship or any other obstacle gets in your path and the AUTOPILOT will stay on course, bad fucking luck, well not luck, stupidity. So it is called autopilot because that is all it is, exactly as used and described for decades. People are now just choosing to reinterpret autopilot in another way now because 'hmm', vested interests and oh yeah, dick brains.

So the design choices not around sound design but design around idiots, how to make a device idiot proof, reliable and low cost. Want to make a Tesla vehicle idiot proof, then don't install the batteries and let the idiots admire the car in their drive way and pose with it in front of passers by.

How to make cars idiot proof, don't fucking let idiots drive them. So zero driver monitoring and instruction in their use is required during driver training and then they should be tested for knowledge on autopilot systems to get their drivers licence. Autopilot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] look it the fuck up. Do not confuse it with 'ROBOTIC' vehicles like the idiots that kill themselves with autopilot vehicles, I certainly hope you do not have one.

It doesn't matter if it's an accurate description or not, it's what people believe that counts. People have heard that autopilot can fly a plane from take off to destination and they even saw a simulator land by itself on Mythbusters. This leads even quite intelligent people to argue for taking the pilots out of the cockpit.

So it is called autopilot because that is all it is, exactly as used and described for decades.

These companies spend millions on advertising and they know what colors bring up what emotions. They know what font to use to be serious or not, depending on what they want the people to understand.They know how words can be used and how they will make people feel. They use it to sell beer and shaving cream and beverages and food.

So they have to be aware what "autopilot" will mean to the majority of people. This i

So the design choices not around sound design but design around idiots, how to make a device idiot proof, reliable and low cost. Want to make a Tesla vehicle idiot proof, then don't install the batteries and let the idiots admire the car in their drive way and pose with it in front of passers by.

How about because it is an accurate description based upon past use. Autopilot in planes and ships, they will take you on the course set, they will not avoid shit or take complex routes, you set them and away they go

That describes the autopilot of a DC-3 or the Chris Craft cabin cruiser of 1954..

The problem is that when the general public thinks "autopilot" what they visualize is the automation and glass cockpit of a modern jumbo jet ---- which can be programmed for collision avoidance and complex routing.

You see this all the time on Slashdot. The geek quotes from the dictionary or tech manual and ignores common usage. It is when the geek turns to marketing that the habit becomes dangerous.

In airplane lingo that's how the term is used. They should have recognized that it's not how the term is used in the eye of the public, but they didn't know or didn't care. "Autopilot" certainly has more marketing potential than "Fancy Cruise Control."

But all, when engaged, are expected to quite safely move the vehicle through the space it's traveling in and allow the pilot to take their hands off the controls and, for modestly short times (ten seconds or more), divert their attention to doing other things (such as looking at charts) with only occasional scans of the area (either visual or via radar etc). Tesla autopilot seems to require the driver's constant attention to avoid running into stationary objects that are routinely encountered on roads (gore

The average US car goes 80 million miles between fatal accidents.The average Tesla goes 320 million miles between fatal accidents.1/3rd to 1/2 of all Tesla miles are on Autopilot.

Now let's say that all fatal Tesla accidents were on Autopilot. Let's ignore the fact most of the "The driver may have been on Autopilot!" crash reporting stories thusfar have ultimately turned out not to involve AP at all. Let's also ignore the fact that since AP driving is much more likely to involve highways and thus higher speeds, it would be expected to involve a higher share of the accidents. Let's just look at the numbers. Even with these assumptions, you would still be 33 to 100% safer driving a Tesla on AP than driving any other car. Acting like you take your attention off the road for a split second and it drives you into a post is just absurd.

What I'm wondering is how long this media hype train can last. I mean, no freaking duh the more vehicles Tesla makes the more people are going to die while driving one. Are they seriously going to keep breathlessly reporting on every last Tesla crash - always with the no-evidence-whatsoever speculation that AP might have been in use, and no retraction whatsoever in the cases where it wasn't? 40 thousand people die on US roads every year. 1.3 million die in them worldwide [un.org]. Seeing a Tesla on the roads is no longer a 1-in-a-million event; Tesla is quickly approaching 0,1% of all US vehicles on the road (nearing 200k). Believe it or not, like all vehicles, there will sometimes be Tesla crashes. And things like it being front page news that someone rear-ended a fire truck at 60 miles an hour as if there's something horribly wrong with Tesla, when the real story should be that someone hit a fire truck at 60 miles an hour and walked away with only a broken ankle, when such an accident should normally be fatal... I'm sorry, but Musk has a serious point about unfair, lopsided media coverage.

Tesla is not an average car, hence your comparison is misleading and you would realise it yourself once you'd stop daydreaming about sucking Musk's dick. Seriously, your kind of fanboyism is bordering on fanatism.

The other thing I often wonder based on these stats... Wouldn't someone driving a very expensive Tesla car probably also be driving more responsibly than someone with say... at 30 year old $300 car? Would the Tesla drivers be as likely to be out driving drunk, driving on dirt/mud/gravel roads?
A lot of bad accidents come from people being stupid idiots, rather than the car being any kind of issue. Auto pilot won't help someone driving almost blackout drunk at 50mph over the speed limit.

Even if Teslas are safer than a comparable priced new BMW or Volvo or Mercedes because they have better survivability (due, for example, to a superior front end crumple zone because there's no need to accommodate an engine/transmission in that area in a Tesla), that's irrelevant to any judgement on Autopilot (for example, if it's technically appropriate or if its name is misleading).

Suppose a Tesla model had 10% the fatality rate per passenger mile of the "average" car. Musk then figured out they could decr

You mean the financial interests I announced in my first point in this thread? You mean the financial interests that I didn't have until the shorts banking on this absurd hyperbole pushed the stock down to ~$250 last month, which was just too tempting for me to keep staying on the sidelines? In case you haven't noticed, I've been talking about Tesla on this site for a lot more than a month.

If you're so anti-Tesla and so utterly convinced it's going to fail, I assume you've shorted TSLA? If not, do you no

Every single person who buys a Tesla has it clearly explained to them that it is not a self driving car. None of them buy one thinking it is 'full self-driving'.
Appears Tesla has better marketing than all those other brands you mentioned previously.

Because they call it fucking AUTOPILOT. Auto, as in automatic, not manual, no human interaction needed, done for you. You claim it's well documented it's assist technology, and if you dig into the fine print I'm sure you're right. But it's also documented very well in the goddamn name that it's not assist technology, it's automatic. Not manual. Not assist. No human interaction needed. Done for you. Auto-fucking-pilot. Fine print disclaimers do not change that.

Because they call it fucking AUTOPILOT. Auto, as in automatic, not manual, no human interaction needed, done for you. You claim it's well documented it's assist technology, and if you dig into the fine print I'm sure you're right. But it's also documented very well in the goddamn name that it's not assist technology, it's automatic. Not manual. Not assist. No human interaction needed. Done for you. Auto-fucking-pilot. Fine print disclaimers do not change that.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Your understanding of autopilot is incorrect. I believe the word you are looking for is autonomous, not automatic.

I think this is an issue of the common layperson assuming they know what autopilot means based on video games, movies, and TV. Autopilot in airplanes and ships is not a complete hands-off automatically do everything for you system. It is essentially the same as tying a rope to the steering wheel in your car and placing

> How come no one is focusing on the personal responsibility of the driver?

Why would it be, if Musk is telling the truth? If "autopilot" is safer than a driver as Musk says, then intervening is more dangerous. Musk now needs to truly prove that autopilot is safer than a person driving a similar car with all of the lane assist, automatic emergency braking, Automatic pedestrian braking... that others manufactures are putting out, or take responsibility for these accidents and deaths. If autopilot is sav

People are horrible at assessing risk, with 500,000 cars on the road even if it handles a few situations worse, if those situations are rare enough Tesla's on autopilot could still be much safer (or not I don't have the stats.) For example seat-belts and airbags have resulted in many serious injuries, and even a few deaths that wouldn't have happened otherwise. But they prevent many times more deaths in the majority of accidents. For

The Model 3 has an MSRP of $35K. That's significantly more on the "affordable" end of the spectrum and is on par with other EVs available now.

The Model S and Model X are high cost to try and actually make money off of them. Pretty much the only reason Tesla has lasted this long, and gotten this far, is by aiming high and building brand reputation. There's just no margin in $35K vehicles and they'd never sell without the branding to back them up.

It was a good strategy and it's worked out brilliantly for them. Victims of their own success at this point.=Smidge=

That "something else" is Tesla producing the more expensive options first in order to increase margins.

I like that word. "first". Your word, not mine. So what you're saying is there is a cheap model, it exists, and you can pre-order it, but it's just not coming off the production line due to the production issues they are facing.

The Model S and Model X are high cost to try and actually make money off of them. Pretty much the only reason Tesla has lasted this long, and gotten this far, is by aiming high and building brand reputation. There's just no margin in $35K vehicles and they'd never sell without the branding to back them up.

You aren't quite correct here.

It's true that the price of the Model S and Model X is high to make a profit. However, it's not true that there is "no margin in $35K vehicles"... Tesla has spent big on fact

> Only Tesla knows for sure, but experts are guessing that Tesla will make a 25% margin on the Model 3.

Keyword: "Will"

Maybe I didn't phrase it properly, but my point was it would have been impossible for them to start out with a low cost vehicle like the Model 3. They didn't have any ability to leverage economies of scale, and they didn't have a brand reputation to support them. As we both point out, the plan was always to aim high.=Smidge=

So if I order a base model 3 today, when will it be delivered? Bear in mind that the waiting list is at least two years long and they haven't even started building the $35k version.

Also, Tesla is making the $65k version and is still operating at a loss. How are they going to then make a profit on a car that is substantially the same (i.e. costs nearly as much to make) but sells for $30k less?

Maybe Cadillac is made by people with experience making cars? And not some Silly Valley big talker?

When Cadillac launches a vehicle into space then you might have a point. Tesla has its issues, but to dismiss Elon Musk as a "Silly Valley big talker" is pretty ignornant--he's achieved quite a bit more than most entrepreneurs in and out of the valley. Doesn't mean he'll manage to displace (or even join) the automotive cartel, but he's certainly more than just a "big talker."

You mean the Silly Valley big talker who created the company that is well on the way to being the first manufacturer to lose their EV credits when they ship too many EVs beating those "expereienced" people?

"well on the way"
Call me when he gets his backlog of car orders filled. Call me again when Tesla stops bleeding money. Call me yet again when Tesla becomes more than a boutique/niche car manufacturer. If they can't hit at least Porsche yearly sales levels, they will never be considered anything else.

Is he a smart guy? Sure. The problems with Tesla take nothing away from the awesomness of SpaceX. Smart people make mistakes though. Tesla, like Apple, tries so hard to be "

I don't need to. I'm calling you out right now for the pathetic little twerp who shits on quite epic achievements of other people that you are.

Call me yet again when Tesla becomes more than a boutique/niche car manufacturer

This one fascinates me, given that this company has singlehandedly changed both the car and the power industry. I guess you'll keep shitting on them until they somehow become some major monopoly force, all the while completely ignoring that Tesla has achieved far more in their first 15 years than Ford ever did.

If they can't hit at least Porsche yearly sales levels, they will never be considered anything else.

Give me a break... I'm not shitting on anything. I'm just pointing out that Teslas accomplishments are nowhere near as game changing as their fanboys would have us believe. Having a huge backlog and bleeding investor dollars is not shitting, they are facts. You seem to think they are irrelevant for some reason. Tesla or not, the industry was headed hybrid and later electric. Tesla may have sped things up a bit, but that was probably based on their over the top predictions for Model 3 deliveries. As f

You realise the entire thread is in reply to "Silicon Valley Big Talker".

I'm just pointing out that Teslas accomplishments are nowhere near as game changing as their fanboys would have us believe.

And yet look at how much the industry has stood up and taken notice.

Having a huge backlog and bleeding investor dollars is not shitting, they are facts.

And it's also not relevant at all to a discussion of technology or changing a market. Which means someone is just looking for reasons to shit on an achievement.

Tesla or not, the industry was headed hybrid and later electric.

Horseshit and you know it. The entire industry basically laughed at Telsa as "impossible". A token effort was given to hybrid and electric didn't exist. It wasn't until Telsa well and truly proved it possible th

Tesla is not hitting any of their estimates [bloomberg.com] for Model 3 production. Not even close. Considering they estimated 20K/month min to "break even", there is no surprise at all they are still losing billions of dollars - BEFORE capital and NRE expenses.

Oh, I have! Most of it is in nice dividend stocks with a 10%+ yield... I'm not going to risk on an emotionally-driven stock like TSLA. Having a price manipulated by pronouncements of a CEO, or buoyed up irregularly by irrational investors is something I do not want to play around in. My guess is we get near the end of the year, TSLA is down to 3-4 months of cash and credit left in the room, and probably is bought out by another major brand. But we'll see...

Elon was able to persuade the board of a publicly traded company (Tesla) to bail out a pet project (Solar city). SpaceX is flush with cash, and credit and is a private company. Tesla is just six months behind target in production.

I'm after autopilot. Electric and affordability aren't worth nearly as much to me as my time. There are many things I'd do differently for each X percent of the drive my car can conduct without me. The value of the car is literally measurable in dollars-per-hour times the hours per year I get to rearrange where and how I conduct my life. I can't afford a driver, but give me a car that lets me focus on work or lets me sleep, and a thousand unavailable desires are answ

So this information was thoughtfully reviewed, felt not to be in the driver's best interest / effective enough to integrate and wasn't. This doesn't seem like an interesting story. This isn't gross negligence, this is just decision making and business.

So this information was thoughtfully reviewed, felt not to be in the driver's best interest / effective enough to integrate and wasn't. This doesn't seem like an interesting story. This isn't gross negligence, this is just decision making and business.

Elon Musk is saying it was ineffective, but he also keeps calling the system an Autopilot.

This is just more evidence that Tesla is trying to have it both ways.

Informally they say:"Look! It's a self-driving car! You just relax and it does everything!!"

Officially they say:"It's basically just fancy cruise control, you need to watch it like a hawk every second it's engaged!!"

In practice they want and expect people to treat it as a self-driving car, but they need to tell them it's cruise-control for legal reasons.

That's why they ditched the eye tracking and other fancy tech that would keep people engaged. The "pay attention" safeguards are in-effective by design.

I test drove a Nissan Leaf with ProDrive, which is a lane following assist tech. It uses steering wheel feedback to make sure you're paying attention, and it felt like I was constantly fighting the car to drive.

I test drove a Nissan Leaf with ProDrive, which is a lane following assist tech. It uses steering wheel feedback to make sure you're paying attention, and it felt like I was constantly fighting the car to drive.

Back off and let the car do its thing. If you're fighting it then you're not actually using the technology as intended. I am driving a 2018 model Nissan Qashqai this week and it's especially great on the highway. Rest your hand on the wheel and let the steering wheel do the work.

Quite a while ago. To build a confused autonomous driving system that actually isn't and needs drive involvement is just dangerous because the human element is just going to switch off. Musk has this bizarre belief that the crashes so far can be blamed on the driver (gee, thanks). It's a scam. They (Musk in particular) are trying to give the impression that self-driving cars are here when they are anything but.

Meanwhile, longs keep making money and shorts keep losing their shirt, cycle after cycle of doom-and-gloom short-selling, followed by none of the doom-and-gloom panning out and the company successfully continuing on its exponential growth pace. Who exactly needs to examine their underlying assumptions here?

What house of cards? I've had my Model S for 5 years and it is by far the most reliable car I've ever owned. It is better than new with the relatively common and painless software improvements. People are amazed when I tell them its over 5 years old because it is still like new.

What I see is a battle of hype vs. misinformation from large market forces who have a great deal to lose when everyone realizes that except for long trips, electric cars are superior in every respect.

There's not many other systems that use eye tracking, although there are a few; I'd like more specifics about what Musk was referring to. There are some weaknesses with eye tracking, like how it doesn't work with sunglasses on, but beyond that.... I just don't think periodic torquing of the wheel is enough (at least it's better than just a pressure sensor... since you can fall asleep while still putting pressure on the wheel).

On the other hand, I have trouble buying into the other claim that it was "too ex